A. The sentence of the lower court (two years of the suspension of the execution of June, protection observation, and community service order 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, for example, that there are two or more records of punishment for the same crime, including the probationary power, there are many records of past crimes including the probationary power, the victim’s damage has not been fully recovered, and the victim did not agree with the victim.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings of this case, such as the fact that the defendant paid 3 million won to the victim at the original instance, deposited 3 million won to the victim, deposited 2 million won in addition to the total amount of damage by additionally depositing 20 million won in the first instance trial, and that the amount equivalent to 8 million won out of the total amount of damage was recovered, and that the defendant recognized his mistake and against himself, etc., the punishment sentenced by the lower court was proper and the sentencing of the lower court is too heavy or too uneasible, and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, each of the unfair sentencing arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.